Answer to John De Albines, Answer to discourse · Chapter 11
The XI. Chapter.
YOu do… verie wel, that S. Paul doth cōpare many times the miſtical body of the church vntounto a natural body, ſeing that Ieſus Chriſt is the head, vntounto whō the body is ioined by ioints, bones, & ſinews. If one ſhould then demande of you, how the feete are ioined to the head, you will anſwere me, by the legs, which are next vntounto the feete. And if I aſke you how the legs are ioyned to the head, you will anſwer, by the ioints, and by the … of the backe, and ſo conſequently from member to member. I doe beleeue, that we are all of one accord,*1 Cor. 10. that the ende of the world is at hand, and ſo conſequently, that we are the lower moſt part of the body, ſo that … the feete or the legs. Then, my maſters, you that hauehave made ſo f…ne a… Anotomie of the Maſſe, at my requeſt make another of the miniſtrie of your congregation.aYou were a very pleaſant man be like, that could thus play your ſelfe a fit of mirth, and when you had done, daunce after your owne pipe, & it ſeemes, you thought that the ſport then would be ſo pleaſant, that no beholder could forbare laughter. If you ſhould ſee ſuch another as Apelles, that would paint a man, and that he had drawen his head, and without painting the reſt of his bodie, he had ſet his feete vnderunder his eares, what would you ſa… to ſuch a Table? (Spectatum admiſsi riſum teneatis amici?) Would you not thinke, that he was a ſimple painter, or elſe a great Ieſter? Euen ſo doe you deſerue, that one ſhould laugh at your miniſterie:bThis is vntrue and a groſſe ſlā der, for we hold and teach, that euer ſince Chriſt to our daies, there hauehave bene both ſhepheards and ſheepe ioyning with vsus in the vnity of faith, & therfore you laugh at your owne ſhadow and vaine fanſie. For you will ioine your Church (if it may bee ſo called) vntounto the church of the Apoſtles, without ſetting forth anie members betweene them. You take but ſcant meaſure, when you will cut of all the Biſhops, Paſtours and doctours, that hauehave beene from the Apoſtles time till our daies, they being the members that followe the head of the church. This maie well be called a new Religion, or, to ſaie the truth, it is a meere preſumption, to flie without winges, or to climbe without a ladder. And I ſaie to you againe, that this is not the waie to followe the counſell of the great Sheepheard, that I mentioned before, who doeth ſaie vntounto vsus, that if we will not miſſe the waie of the Catholicks, we ought to follow the flocke of thoſe ſheepe, that hauehave gone before vsus, that is to ſaie, that we ſhould reckoncBut th…s in truth yours cānot do, therefore yours is not the Catholicke Church by your owne reaſon. by ſucceſſion, the Paſtours that hauehave ſucceeded in continuance of one kinde of doctrine, the which, as we hauehave ſhewed, the Catholicke church doeth, and hath euer done.
The XI. Chapter.
As though you had moſt ſubſtātially proued by Caluins words, that we cut of all Chriſtians betwixt the Apoſtles and vsus, in this Chapter you vrge the metaphor of a body, whereunto vſually the church of Chriſt is compared: whereupon you gather, that as there is an orderly connexion and ſituation of members in a body, ſo there muſt be in the church; and that therefore our church muſt needes be a monſtrous miſhapen thing, in ioyning the Chriſtians of theſe later daies, with the Apoſtles, without any betwixt, and foſ… ating, as it were, the feete of the body hard to the eares, without any other members betwixt the one and the other. And thus hauing framed this mery conceit in your owne heade, you call vponupon your frendes to laugh at it with you, and ſo you proceede in telling vsus, that whiles we take this courſe, we fly without wings, and climbe without a ladder, and deſpiſe the counſell of Salomon: which after your maner you interpret that we ſhould reckon by ſucceſſion the paſtours, that hauehave ſucceeded in continuance of one kinde of doctrine, the which (you ſay) you hauehave ſhewed you hauehave done. To what purpoſe now is all this, ſeeing in trueth neither we doe thus cut of all Chriſtians betwixt them and vsus, neither hauehave you ſhewed any ſuch ſucceſſion of paſtours downe from them to you, continuing in your doctrine. Truely to no other purpoſe can they ſerue, but to expreſſe your owne ridiculous vanity. Howbeit, becauſe you called in the former Chapter for the names of thoſe, that hauehave caught vsus to deny your real preſence in the ſacrament, and vponupon a conceit in your owne fanſie, that you hauehave poſed vsus, you hauehave growen to bee thus full of theſe ſwelling wordes of vanity, and becauſe I feare, neither you, nor many of your diſciples, will vouchſafe to peruſe thoſe books that I ſent you vntounto, for anſwere in that point, & yet hauehave hope, that for your ſake ſome of you may chaūce vouchſafe to reade this: I will not ſticke with you, particulerly to ſatiſfie your requeſt a little further. Firſt therefore vnderſtand, that we hauehave learned to deny your kinde of reall preſence of Chriſt himſelfe, the inſtitutour of this Sacrament, becauſe he hath flatly and vehemently affirmed without exception, Iohn. 6.54. that whoſoeuer eateth his fleſh, & drinketh his bloud hath eternall life. Whereas by the meanes of your doctrine it followeth (becauſe all that receiue this ſacrament hauehave not faith, but manie lacke it) that it ſhall bee eaten of manie that ſhalbe neuer the better by it, but the worſe. We hauehave alſo further learned it of him, in that in the ſame Chapter, ſpeaking of the eating of his body, & drinking of his bloud, he drew his hearers from a groſſe conceit of eating & drinking him by their bodily mouthes, by vſing of the word beleeueth in ſtead of eateth and drinketh, ver. 40.47. and cap. 7.38. by mentioning vntounto them his aſcention, Iohn. 6.62. & lattly by ſaying vntounto thē, It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the fleſh profiteth nothing: the words that I ſpeake vntounto you, are ſpirit & life: ver. 63. This finally we hauehave learned of him, ſaying, If any ſhall ſay vntounto you, Lo here is Chriſt, there is Chriſt, beleeue it not. Math. 24.23. & by his continuing at the table, when he firſt inſtituted and miniſtred it vntounto his Apoſtles, without alteration either of his place, or forme. Mat. 26. Mar. 12. Luke. 22.1. Cor. 11. The Apoſtles & euā geliſts hauehave alſo taught vsus to deny it, in yt they teach vsus, that he viſibly aſcēded into heauen, & that he ſhall ſo alſo come againe, whē he cōmeth frō thence &c. Act. 1.11. eſpecially ſeeing his comming to iudgement is called his ſecōd comming, Heb, 9.28. and vntil the reſtitutiō of all things, it is ſaied by Peter, the heauēs muſt cōtaine him. Act. 3.21. The Euāgeliſts in laying downe vntounto vsus the ſtory of his natiuity, life & death, ſo prouing vntounto vsus, yt he was & is a true and perfect mā, encourage vsus alſo (leaſt we ſhould with the Marcionites, & other heretiques denie the trueth of his māhood) cōtantly to …y your reall preſēce; for ye maintenance whereof, you are driuē to fanſy a nūber of things quite contrary to ye nature & trueth of his māhood. And laſtly, in that reciting ye words of the inſtitution, they tel vsus, that Chriſt commanded that to be done in remēbrance of him, Luke. 22.19. 1. Cor. 11.24. & there Paul ſaith (v. 26.) As often as ye ſhall eate this bread, & drink this cup, ye ſhew the lords death till he cōe: wc words plainly argu, yt though ye ſacramēt be both rightly miniſtres… receiued, yet it inferreth not any ſuch real preſēce, as you ther imag….
Now betwixt them & vsus we finde infinite places, in writers of all ages, that teach vsus ſtill to denie your reall preſence: but amongſt many, marke theſe for example. Tertulliā in his 4. booke againſt Marciō interpreteth theſe words. Hoc eſt corpus meum, thus, that is to ſay, This is a figure of my body. Auguſtine againſt Adamātus ye Manichee, c. 12. writeth, that chriſt doubted not to ſay, This is my body, whē he gaue a ſigne of his body: & vpō ye 3. Pſ. he ſaieth, that Chriſt admitted Iudas to a bāquet, where he cōmēded a figure of his body to his diſciples: & vpō ye 98. Pſ. he ſaith, yee ſhal not eat this body that yee ſee, neither ſhall yee drinke that bloud, which they ſhall ſhed that crucify me: I hauehave cōmended vntounto you a certaine ſacrament, it being ſpiritually vnderſtoode will giuegive you life. In his 3. booke therfore of Chriſtian doctrine he writeth thus, This ſaying of Chriſt, Except yee eate the fleſh of the ſon of mā &c. ſeemeth to cōmand an heinous thing, & a wicked: therefore it is a figure, cō māding vsus to be partakers of Chriſts paſſiō, keeping in our minds to our great profit & cōfort, that his fleſh was crucified & woūded for vsus. c. 16. he ſaith, It is a miſerable ſlauery of the ſoule to take the ſignes for the things ſignified, in ye ſame booke, c. 5. And therefore in his 23. epiſtle, he telleth vsus, that the ſimilitude betwixt the ſigne & the thing ſignified is the cauſe, why the one beareth the name of the other in ſacramēts: & in his 57. queſtiō vpō Leuitic. he giueth vsus this rule, The thing that ſignifieth, is wōt to bear the name of the thing which it ſignifieth; as Paul ſaid, The rock was Chriſt, & not, it ſignified Chriſt, but euē as it had bene indeed, which neuertheles was not Chriſt by ſubſtāce, but by ſignification. So that his vſual doctrine is, to teach vsus in this ſacrament, to ſeeke chriſt in heauē by faith, & thereby to make him preſent, wc otherwiſe is abſent, as you may read in his 50. tract vponupon Iohn, & els where very often. And wt Auguſtine ye reſt of the fathers conſent in this matter, & therefore nothing is more cōmō wt them, then to call the outward part in this ſacrament a ſigne, figure, ſimilitude, reſemblance, or repreſentatiō, as it appeareth in theſe places. Chryſoſtom in his 83. Homil: vponupon Mat. Hierom in his 2. booke againſt Iouiniā, Ambr. in his 4. booke of ye ſacraments, c. 5. Baſil in his lyturgy: Ephr: in his 4. booke againſt the impugners of Chriſts manhood by humane reaſon. And Origen vpō Leuit: hom: 7. teacheth vsus, that the letter of thoſe words, Except yee eat the fleſh of the ſon of mā &c. killeth: & therefore he teacheth vsus there ſpiritually to vnderſtand them. Who vponupon theſe wordes of Chriſt gathereth, that no wicked man can eate the fleſh of chriſt, vponupon Mat. c. 15. as for ye other part, he granteth the wicked may eat, & that when it hath beene eatē, in the end it is auoided into the place of eaſement, Hom: 15. vponupon Mat. Athanaſius noteth, ye chriſt made mention of his aſcenſion. Iohn 6. to wtdraw thē from corporall & fleſhly vnderſtāding of his words; vponupon theſe words, whoſoeuer ſpeaketh a word againſt the ſon &c. But Chryſ. goeth plainly to work & ſaith in his 11. Hom: vponupon Mat. that the very body of chriſt himſelfe is not in the holy veſſels, but the miſtery & ſacrament thereof is therin conteined. And therefore in his 46. Hom. vponupon Iohn, ſheweth vsus, ye chriſt ſaying the fleſh profiteth nothing Iohn 6. therby warned vsus to take heede of carnall and fleſhly vnderſtanding of his words: which is to vnderſtand them (ſaieth he) ſimply: and in his 4. Homil: vponupon the 4. to the Corinth: he telleth vsus, that the body of Chriſt is the carion, where the Eagles will bee: he nameth eagles (ſaieth he) to ſhew, that who ſo will approch to his body, muſt mount aloft & hauehave no dealing with the earth, nor be drawē downward, but muſt euermore fly vp &c. For this is a table of Eagles (ſaieth he) that fly on high, & not of Iaies, that creepe beneath. Chriſt tooke bread which cōforteth mās hart, that he might repreſēt therby his body & bloud, ſaith Hier. vpō ye 26. of Mat. As thou haſt in baptiſm receued the ſimilitude of death ſo likewiſe doſt thou in this ſacramēt drīk the ſimilitude of chriſts bloud, ſaieth Ambroſe in his 4 booke, & 4, c. of the ſacraments. Ciprian de vnctione chriſmatis, writeth thus, Chriſt in his laſt ſupper gaue vntounto his Apoſtles bread & wine, which he called his body & bloud but on the Croſſe hee gaue his very body to be wounded with the hands of the ſouldiers, that the Apoſtles might declare vntounto the world, how & in what maner, the bread may be the fleſh & bloud of Chriſt. And the maner ſtraight way he declareth thus, that thoſe things, which do ſignifie, & thoſe things which be ſignified by thē, may be both called by one name. Fulgētius in his booke to King Thraſimund hath theſe words, This cup or chalice is the new Teſtamēt, that is to ſay, doth ſignifie the new Teſtament. Theodoret in his firſt Dialogue moſt plainely writeth, that Chriſt honoured the ſignes and repreſentatiōs, which are ſeene, with the name of his body and bloud, not changing their natures, but adding grace to nature: and yet more plainely in the 2. Dialogue he writeth thus: the myſtical ſignes after ſanctification go not from their nature: for they tary in their former ſubſtance, figure, and forme. Yea euen Gelaſius a Pope, about the yeare 500. againſt Eutiches, is as plaine, ſaying, in the Euchariſt the ſubſtāce and nature of bread and wine ceaſe not. For the image and ſimilitude of the body and bloud is celebrated in thoſe myſteries. And Bertram in his treatiſe of this matter, writen in the time of Carolus Caluus laboureth by many proofes & teſtimonies to ſhew, that bread and wine remaine ſtill, and that we are here to followe Chriſt in a figure and miſtery. And Bede vponupon Luke. 22. ſaith, becauſe bread doeth comfort mans heart, and wine doeth make good bloud in his body: therefore the bread is myſtically compared to Chriſts body, and the wine to Chriſts bloud. The like ſaying hath Haymo in his 5. booke De ſermonum proprietate. Emiſſenus de conſecrat. Diſt. 2. cap. Quia corpus; compareth the conuerſion in the Sacrament to the conuerſion in a man regenerated, which we all know is in quality, and not in ſubſtance. There are two Epiſtles yet extant in the Saxon tongue, made by one Alfricke in King Etheldreds time; about the yeare of the Lord 996, being then (as ſome write) Biſhop of Canterbury, wherein he teacheth the bread and wine to be no otherwiſe the body and bloud of Chriſt, then manna, and the water of the rocke was Chriſt: who alſo tranſlated 80 ſermons out of latin into the Saxon tongue, whereof 24. were appointed to be read for homilies: and in that which was to be read on Eaſter day, there is much direct matter againſt Tranſubſtantiation, and your reall preſence. And ſince theſe times you know well inough wee hauehave had many from time to time (yea, mo thē you well like of) that hauehave beene as flat and direct againſt your kinde of reall preſence, as we are now. This Maſter Foxes booke of Actes and Monuments hath made euident to all the world. And it is famouſly knowen, that before your Lateran Councel, vnderunder Innocent the 3. in the yeare 1215. it was not decreed to bee as you now hold. It appeareth alſo by the laſt ſeſſion of the councell of Florence (which is not much aboue 140. yeares ago) that the Greeke Church vntill then ſtoode againſt your doctrine of tranſubſtantiation, which is the ground of your reall preſence. And Tonſtall (though otherwiſe a great man on your ſide) yet in his booke of this ſacrament, ſaieth, perhaps it had beene better to leaue eueryevery man that would be curious concerning this matter, of the maner how Chriſt is preſent, to his owne coniecture; as by his confeſſion, before the councel of Lateran, it was left at libertie. And Iohn Duns, a frend of yours, vponupon the 4. booke of the ſentences ſaieth, that the wordes might hauehave beene expounded more plainely, then by Tranſubſtantiation, if it had pleaſed the Church. Gabriel Biell another great doctour, vponupon the canon of the maſſe in his 40. reading plainely confeſſeth, that it is not expreſſed in the canon of the Bible, how the body of Chriſt is there, whither by Trāſubſtantiatiō or Conſubſtantiation. Euen ſo your great Biſhop Iohn Fiſher writing againſt Luthers booke of the captiuity of Babylō, is enforced to confeſſe, that he findeth not in Mathew, nor any where els in the ſcripture, any thing to proue, that there is thereby the reall preſence of Chriſt in your maſſe: nor that whenſoeuer a Prieſt ſhall go about that matter, hee maketh the bread & wine the body and bloud of Chriſt: and ſo concludeth, that he thinketh, that eueryevery man vnderſtandeth, that the certaintie of that matter dependeth not ſo much of the Goſpell, as it doeth vponupon the vſe, tradition and cuſtome of the Church. Theſe teſtimonies foraſmuch as directly they are againſt your literall expoſition of Chriſts words, your new deuiſe of tranſubſtantiation, the onelyonly piller and buttreſſe of your real preſence, and againſt your groſſe and carnal eating of him with the bodily mouthes of all receiuers good and bad, they may not bee denied to bee forcible againſt your reall preſence. For the cauſe thereof denied and taken away, the effect muſt ceaſe: and if the conſequent thereof, which is eating of Chriſtes precious bodie with the filthy mouthes of vnbeleeuers bee abſurd, the antecedent thereof muſt alſo bee abſurde.
Howbeit, becauſe you ſhall not ſay, that we are vnwilling to yeelde you thorowly an account, why we deny your reall preſence; vnderſtand you yet further, we are mooued ſo to doe, becauſe your doctrine of trāſubſtantiation (the onelyonly vpholder thereof) and the doctrine it ſelfe (as you holde it) bringeth in, without all reaſon, ſuch an interpretation and conſtruction of the wordes of the inſtruction of this Sacrament, as taketh away the analogie betweene the ſignes, and the thinges whereof they are ſignes, ouerthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, in anihilating or otherwiſe abandoning the outward part; which ſcripture, and al antiquity neceſſarily require to continue, to the conſtitution of a Sacrament: as bringeth in many monſtrous abſurdities and needeleſſe miracles, contrary both to the true faith of Chriſtes manhoode, and good maners; abhorring, both by nature and expreſſe warrant of the ſcripture, from eating and drinking of mans fleſh and bloud couered or vncouered: and as laſtly inferreth an eating, & drinking of Chriſt by the mouthes of the wicked and vnbeleeuers, as wel as of beleeuers. Which eating of Chriſt with the bodily mouth, neither ſtandeth with the doctrine of the word (which teacheth no ſuch bodily commition of our bo…ies wt Chriſts, & therefore (ſeeing the ſacraments are but confirmations of that which is taught in the word) cannot, or may not be taught herein) nor yet wt the nature of the couenāt & communion wt chriſt, which is ſpirituall, & belongeth only to the faithful, & therefore only m…ſt be offered, ſealed & ratified in this ſacrament to them. And yet for al…s, I would not hauehave you to imagine, yt we deny al kinde of reall preſēce in this ſacrament of Chriſts body & bloud. For we doe moſt conſtātly teach wt the ancient fathers, that in this ſacrament though by means thereof there be a change in name, vſe, honour, and eſtimation in the outward elements; yet they remaine ſtil to be fed on wt ye mouth of the body, and that when by occaſion of that which is done by the outward elements, the communicāt calleth thankfully to remembrāce chriſts death, and beleeueth that his body was as certainly broken for him … his bloud ſhed, as there he ſeeth the bread brokē, wine poured out, and both deliuered vntounto him; & that thereby his ful & perfect ſaluatiō was abſolutely wrought: thē by this mouth of his ſoule, faith, he as certainly, though after a ſpiritual, & vnſpeakeable maner, feedeth vpō chriſts very broken body, & bloudſhed, & groweth through the working of the ſpirit to a cōmunion therwt, as by the mouth of his body he feedeth vpō the outward elements, & ſo by the force of nature hath them vnited wt his nature. And marueil not, that faith can & doth make ye body brokē and bloud ſhed of Chriſt (which was now done 1500. yeares ago) yet liuely & truly preſent. For it can make things ſpoken & taught in the word (though done neuer ſo long ago) & things abſent to be preſent. And therefore whē Paul wrote to the Galat: though chriſt long before had beene crucified, and was aſcended, yet by the meanes of the word & ſacraments on the one ſide miniſtred amongſt thē, and of their faith on the other ſide, he ſaith, that Chriſt was euē crucified amōgſt thē. Gal. 3. wherein (as Chryſoſtom noteth vpō that place) his meaning was, to ſhew the ſtrēgth of faith, which is able to ſee things though far away, & that by the eies of faith, Chriſts death was more clearly & perfectly ſeene, then it was of many, that were preſent at it, & ſaw all that was done. You ſeeme in this your doctrine, and for the defence thereof, to be great aduancers of Gods omnipotencie. But in Chriſtes time, I pray you tell me, whither they that beleeued that Chriſt could fulfill their deſire though abſent; or they that thought, he muſt be locally preſent, or els it would not be, had the greater faith in his omnipotencie? I am ſure you will ſay, the faith of the former was the ſtronger, and that they therein ſhewed themſelues better perſwaded of Chriſtes almightineſſe, then the later, for the euidence of the matter will enforce you to confeſſe thus much. Then to applie this to this preſent matter, the thing, that both you and wee deſire, is, truely to bee fedde with the bodie and bloud of Chriſt to eternall life: whither then doe wee or you indeede beleeue his omnipotencie better: we, that ſay and beleeue, that he can and doeth feede vsus herewith, and vnite vsus and himſelfe together in the vſe of this ſacrament, hee tarrying ſtill in heauen according to the Scriptures; or you, that imagine, that hee cannot doe it, vnleſſe hee creepe into your mouthes, vnderunder the formes of bread and wine? Nay, whatſoeuer you talke of his omnipotencie, this argueth, that your faith is too too weake therein, in that you muſt hauehave ſuch a reall preſence of him, as you imagine, or elſe you thinke it will not ſerue your turne. You will graunt, that diſtance of place betwixt heade and feet, betwixt man and wife, father and ſonne breaketh not, nor hindreth the vnion, that nature hath made betweene them: what weaknes of faith then were it, to thinke, that Chriſt our head, our huſbād, our father muſt be locally conioined with vsus, or els the vnion betwixt him and vsus cannot be perfected? Aſſure your ſelues, if beeing at this table, you will ſecke him by faith, where hee is in heauen, and not, as you doe, in the formes of bread and wine (whereunto only your owne fanſie hath tied him) by your faith you ſhall ſo reach, and apprehend him, and hee by his ſpirit will ſo embrace you, that there was neuer head more ſurely by vienes, ſinewes, arteries and other helps of nature tied vntounto the inferiour parts, nor huſband to wife, nor father to ſonne more faſt and ſurely linked and knit, by the bonds of naturall vnion, then he will vnite himſelfe vntounto you. For the defence of your reall preſence, and for the auoiding of many abſurdities concerning Chriſts manhoode, that thereby you are fallen into, you talke much of the ſtate of Chriſtes glorified body. But alas, doe you not ſee, that whatſoeuer you talke thereof, is quite beſides the purpoſe? For this is not a Sacrament of his glorified bodie, but of his crucified bodie: not of the coniunction of his bodie and bloud, but of the ſeparation of the one from the other: and therefore Chriſt in the inſtitution, called not bread and wine ſimply his bodie and bloud, but his bodie broken and bloud ſhed, and gaue the bread a ſacrament of the one, and the wine, a part from the bread, a Sacrament of the other. Whereupon it is euident, that here we hauehave to doe with his paſſible body, with his bodie broken, & his bloud ſhed vponupon the croſſe, and not with the ſtate of his glorified and impaſſible body; and therefore vnleſſe the ſtate of his paſſible body dying vponupon the croſſe, will ſtand with your reall preſence, it hath no place here. For by the very wordes of the inſtitution (which you would ſeeme otherwhiles moſt carefully and literally to vrge) it is the body broken and the bloud ſhed, that muſt here be really preſent: which otherwiſe then by faith, how can it be? ſeeing it is ſo lōg ſince his body was brokē, and bloud ſhed; and ſince it hath not beene really at any time iterated, nor can be, for he died once for all, and ſo, that ſince he is not to die any more, as the ſcripture teacheth, Rom. 6. Which if you and your fellows would ſeriouſly marke, the naked and bare words of the inſtitution, would driue you from your kinde of reall preſence (which cannot be of the body broken, and bloudſhed of Chriſt now) to embrace our reall preſence thereof, thorow faith and effectuall remembrance, that they were once ſo vſed to our redemption, which is poſſible and effectuall vntounto ſaluation. Thus much to anſwere your demande concerning this matter.